Compilation [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2016-05-24 14:27 (2276 d 03:16 ago) – Posting: # 16359
Views: 27,483

Dear all,

in R / lmerTest() one can get maximum likelihood estimation by setting the argument REML=FALSE in the model statement (default is REML=TRUE). Satterthwaite’s DF are 10.858 for the intercept and 6.884 for the slope. In lme() use method="ML" (default is method="REML"). Below a compilation (in analogy to BE rounded to four decimal figures and grouped by “similarity”):

Software        Method      Estimate      90% CI   
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════
SAS (Smith)   ML/Satter.   B0 1.94    1.54   2.35  
                           B1 0.7615  0.679  0.844 
SAS           ML/Satter.   B0 1.9425  1.5391 2.3458
                           B1 0.7615  0.6789 0.8441
R lmerTest    ML/Satter.   B0 1.9425  1.5391 2.3458
                           B1 0.7615  0.6789 0.8441
───────────────────────────────────────────────────
R lme         ML           B0 1.9425  1.5175 2.3675
                           B1 0.7615  0.6738 0.8491
───────────────────────────────────────────────────
SAS           ML/contain.  B0 1.9414  1.5175 2.3675
                           B1 0.7615  0.6738 0.8491
───────────────────────────────────────────────────
SAS           REML/Satter. B0 1.9414  1.4968 2.3860
                           B1 0.7617  0.6696 0.8539
PHX/WNL       REML/Satter. B0 1.9414  1.4968 2.3860
                           B1 0.7617  0.6696 0.8539
R lmerTest    REML/Satter. B0 1.9414  1.4968 2.3860
                           B1 0.7617  0.6696 0.8539
───────────────────────────────────────────────────
NCSS          method?      B0 1.9414  1.4849 2.3978
                           B1 0.7617  0.6659 0.8576
───────────────────────────────────────────────────
SAS           ML/contain.  B0 1.9414  1.4807 2.4020
                           B1 0.7617  0.6665 0.8570
R lme         REML         B0 1.9414  1.4807 2.4020
                           B1 0.7617  0.6665 0.8570
───────────────────────────────────────────────────
PHX/WNL       REML/resid.  B0 1.9414  1.4515 2.4313
                           B1 0.7617  0.6665 0.8570


My preference is REML/Satterthwaite because one could reproduce results in three different software packages. I would avoid NCSS; no idea how the calculation is done.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖 [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,305 posts in 4,668 threads, 1,587 registered users;
online 11 (1 registered, 10 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 17:43 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There is no point in being precise when you don’t know
what you’re talking about.    attributed to John Tukey

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5